Recent Posts by weasel1962

The L2A5 added armour to the L2A4 which is exactly what SAF did.
There were also other design changes e.g. gunner sight, gun braking
in L2A5 but the L2SG can probably be considered an
L2A5 equivalent. The L2A6 introduced a L55 gun.

The 182 number is taken off a SIPRI report which can be accessed
from below.

More accurate (in my opinion) data is probably from UN arms
register. In that register, the German Government reported 158 sold
to Singapore whilst Singapore Government acknowledged 156 (up to
year 2012). 2013 deliveries will only be reported in
July/August.

It is more F-15s AND F-35s! The decision to shift PLAB already
funds both acquisitions. The F-15SE is not as stealthy as the F-35
so the incremental benefit compared to the F-15SG may not justify
the added cost i.e. F-15SG almost as effective. AFM july 2013 issue
already reports Singapore has ordered another sqn of F-15SG as
F-15SE & F-35 not ready yet. In any case, many of the F-15SE
features e.g. CWB can be retrofitted on F-15SG.

If just more F-15SEs are bought, Singapore will need more
airbases as each F-15 needs minimum 8000 ft runway.This has to be
funded by tax increases as PLAB cannot be spared. Saudi spent $30
billion for 84 F-15SA (not even -SE) so that's a lot of taxes to
raise.

On the F-35, recent reports indicate 75 will be bought which
presumably will replace the F-16s. In selecting the F-35B variant,
this allows the RSAF to buy more fighters in exchange for PLAB land
sales. The F-35B can take off in under 600 ft of runway without ski
jump and no need runway to land so more aircraft can be based per
runway! Recent land sales data show each hectare can fetch as much
as S$300m or more for Paya Lebar area (todays prices not even
counting future inflation). In 2030, the land price could be even
higher. PLAB = 800 hectares.

The irony is that starvation might have killed more civilians
esp children than bombs would. This esp when food always goes to
soldiers first. And the top who makes the decisions end up always
getting fed.

Its easy to see things with hindsight. But in 1945, the US was
looking for the quickest way to end the war. Starvation could have
been a significantly longer process. I remember reading that an
operations analyst commitee working for the joint chiefs calculated
it might have taken 2 years from 1945 to force Japan to surrender
thru blockade alone. Not everyone would know in 1945 how much
impact the blockade would have had on Japan. People know now the
blockade was working but did people know in 1945 that the blockade
was working? Fog of war.

The blockade was working. Japan has never had the resources on
the home islands to feed her people and fuel her industries. The
people were slowly starving and industrial complexes had all but
shut down. Even if Japan still had the will to fight, she lacked
the ability. To be sure, plans for Operation Downfall (for the
invasion of the Japanese home islands) had been prepared. Casualty
estimates that ranged from the sublime to the ridiculous and been
forecast. It is common sense to draw up battle plans and
contingencies. It is another matter entirely to put them in motion.
The Germans had plans for the Invasion of Great Britain but they
never seriously considered going forward with Operation Sealion.
The US had continuously revised the Rainbow Five, but no one in the
Pentagon thought for a moment that the US would invade Australia,
Canada, Great Britain, Ireland or India. Likewise, no one believed
for an instant that the invasion of Japan would ever come to pass.
It simply wasn't going to be necessary.

The Joint chiefs including MacArthur were prepared to invade
Japan. In particular, one should consider MacArthur's 3 options
which covered the scenarios discussed plus invasion (read link
above, pp 397-398) and pertinent to note MacArthur's preferred
option was to invade rather than bomb/blockade. It was Truman who
decided to go ahead with the atom bomb after Okinawa showed how
many casaulties could be caused by an invasion. The C-in-C has the
last say.

Japan never would have surrendered just through isolation. By
war’s end, Japan was still holding on to many territories including
Singapore, Taiwan etc. Japan would have continued the policy of
kamikaze pilots and constructing its war machines because that’s
their psyche. The 2 atom bombs compelled the emperor to force his
military to seek terms i.e. surrender. Those are the facts. It was
also because the Japs did not know that the US only had 2 atom
bombs and Roosevelt threatened to carry on atom bombing the
Japanese cities. Without the emperor’s intervention, the military
was prepared to continue the war indefinitely (or so they
said).

In a way, the atom bombs, despite their devastation, freed
Singapore earlier. The atom bombs killed far less people than the
B-29 bombings and fire raids did but the latter did not force the
emperor to seek peace.

US burning their $B (aka printing money) is good for SG as it
lowers the exchange rate. So something that cost S$200 last time
only cost S$120 today. That’s partly how we have managed to stretch
our defence dollars.

News is not new as a CVN has been suggested under a type 089
project since 2007. Indeed, China was then suggested to be
intending to build 1-2 Varyag sized carriers under a type 085
project by 2015. LHD projects have also been suggested under type
075 projects. A research project on nuclear propulsion is expected
to take several years to complete. Some analysts have suggested
that the study may be completed earlier if the propulsion system is
based on existing submarine reactors (possibly multiple units
hooked up together). imho, submarine nuclear reactors generate a
lot less electricity than CVNs as the usage patterns are different.
In the context of increasing china oil imports, the move to nuclear
propulsion (even for commercial marine applications where
supertankers can be as big or larger than CVNs) is not
surprising.

The date coincides with the delivery of fearless-class
replacement patrol vessels which suggest the new class may include
helipads. Recently, ST has also been awarded a contract to supply
Oman with helipad-equipped PVs based on the Fearless-75 platform.
The weapons fit per Flight report is unclear.

The 6 x RSAF S-70B in service are equipped
only with Whitehead torpedoes but can be equipped with Mk-54
torpedoes, hellfire missiles or penguin anti-ship missiles.
Hellfire missiles are already used on RSAF
AH-64Ds. The Penguin missile has been marketed to
RSAF in several prior aerospace events (from
Asian aerospace times). Although designed for the LAMPS III helicopters (S-70 derivatives), the 33km ranged
missiles are also used on Norwegian & USAF
F-16s. A switch to the Mk-54 from the ranged A/S244
whitehead torpedo is not expected. The mod 3 whitehead torpedo has
a range exceeding 13km (officially listed as 6km on mindef website)
and is in use with 15 navies.

With 470+ lost in accidents out of 946 procured, the Mig-21s aka
“flying coffins” have been a surprise to the IAF alright. The last crash of a bison on my record was
on Nov 24, 2012. The remaining including the 110+ bison (roughly 6
squadrons out of 9 Mig-21 sqn still in service) and another 70+
Mig-21 will be phased out between 2014-2017 period. Flight lists
152 still active. The Mig sqns still occupy almost 1/3 of
IAF sqns although many squadrons are replaced
by Su-30MKIs and hopefully will be completely replaced with the
Rafale (if they get the contract finalised).

Paya Lebar Airbase is also used for delivering commercial
aircraft for maintenance/servicing at the nearby ST Aerospace.

What I can say is, the government will definitely not close down
any of these 3 airbases for the next 10-20 years.

The F-35s are currently still in prototype/testing phase and
there's a lot of commotion going on with Lockheed Martin and the US
govt regarding their funding and expenditure. It's kinda stuck
right now so don't expect them to deliver so soon.

I still don't think PLAB is fully utilised. Emergency runway
probably gets invoked at most once a year (and there are lots of
alternative commercial emergency runways in the region.). As to ST
maintenance/servicing, I don't see much difficulty to shift those
ops to other airbases. Most of the freight ops goes out of
Changi/Seletar. Agree that Government, particularly the RSAF, will
not lightly give up any of the airbases. Its easier just to budget
$XX billions for new aircraft acquisition.

Canada has just audited numbers to suggest 65 F-35As will cost
C$44.8b (S$55.55b) for a 42 year service life or S$855m per F-35A.
That's how much more SG taxpayers will just have to fork out per
option A if we ignore option B. Pay and pay loh.

There is no such thing called segregation of responsibilities!!
Singapore's defence budget FY 2011/12 is a record $12.08 billion,
22% of our total FY2012 operating expenditure, about 5% of GDP. ST
and other defence related industries are separate entities. These
companies are responsible to their shareholders for what they do,
if they don't make profit, they close!!

Defence budget is allocated by the government for the defence of
singapore, they use national budget that comes from taxes, from the
people, not from profit. It is their duty to be prodent in how they
spend, not how much they can get by selling airbase. If they sell
paya lebar airbase, or tekong, the money goes right back to the
government!

Actually, there is segregation, otherwise why need so many
ministries? MOF is responsible for Government budget. Personnally,
I know MOF and Mindef works very closely on defence expenditure.
Every ministry will have to provide a budget. If you think
facilities management don't come under DSTA, think again.
Infrastructure management comes under systems management. New camp
etc all need money. Old camp gets demolished get redeveloped. Last
one I can think of was Seletar.

When I did my NS, no maid leh. Fewer young people these days got
respect for old ex-reservist….

In my day, have to chong swa with very heavy equipment and dig
trench while under the obligatory constant abuse. lol. Today, NSmen
can play computer games eg simulator and got Ipad somemore! The
difference most obvious to me is that I hear today NSnen in some
camps take bath even got hot water!

Singapore will eventually belong to next generation. They have
decide for themselves whether NS is relevant. If they want to hear
advice from oldie, that’s up to them. If they make wrong decision,
they pay the price.

Not missing the point. Its called segregation of
responsibilities. Actually, DSTA is the party
responsible for implementing defence technology plans, acquiring
defence materiel and developing defence infrastructure. Defence
infrastructure is important to Singapore. The local defence
industry partner is Singapore Technologies.

defence is not an industry, if you want to generate income, tell
mindef to invest in plan to turn bomb shells into chopping knife,
rent out the amphibious crafts to carry tourists around the islands
in Singapore, use helicopters to give singaporean a birdeyes view
of marina bay and charging them $500 per ride......

Defence is not an industry? Someone forgot to tell Singapore
Technologies....

In defence, the generation of today is more tech-savvy. Why dig
trench using changkol when a digger can do the same in 1/100th the
time? Less need to chong swa when IFV carry
troops all the way liao or better yet, press one button = enemy
gone case. If we have the desire to protect our families and our
homeland, we should encourage people to think what is the best way
of doing it. Maybe NS still works today but will NS be relevant
tomorrow?

If you look at the defence budget, the question is whether there
are ways to generate more income, change how procurement works and
manage defence $ better instead of merely think of defence
expenditure as a straight line cost?

That’s the same argument with the CVE. One
can either look at the CVE or new fighters as
merely extra $$$ spent or go back to the first question on page 23.
Its a way of showing that CVEs can be more than affordable due to
the trade-offs….or we can stick to the usual strategy of just pay
more for defence.

Paya Lebar airport used to handle hundreds of airliners and over
50,000 aircraft movements a year. Does the RSAF even fly 1/10th that amount every year?

Once the F-5s retire which won’t be long, RSAF won’t be as big as it used to be. 70+ fighters (14
F-15s – 10 based in MHAFB, 60 F-16s) won’t
need that many airbases to function efficiently. The F-50s and
KC-135s are already based at Changi. Only 14 more transports/Awacs
to base.

The F-35s aren’t cheap. Canada already estimates 65 F-35As will
cost C$30billion (S$37b) over 36 years service lifetime. That means
a sqn of F-35s could cost as much as S$12b each. Singapore can’t
even pay its bus drivers enough but we take the easy way out by
raising bus fares. Sure, all these toys are as “affordable” as
$2000 psf condos or $100k COE cars. How much
additional fare will need to go up to pay for new fighters?

y Friend was working through an agency and when she was working only from 12 noon till 6pm. While working, she was informed by her colleague (lets name her Anna) that she was allowed to take the vouchers and the free items since CNY was coming to and end